Appeals court upholds ban on union-favored hiring practice

Friday

Jul 18, 2014 at 3:20 AMJul 18, 2014 at 3:27 AM

Patrick Ronan The Patriot Ledger @pronan_Ledger

BOSTON – A federal appeals court has ruled that communities in four New England states, including Massachusetts, cannot require companies bidding for public construction jobs to have employee-apprentice programs, a blow to trade unions that have traditionally benefited from such policies.

On Wednesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled against the city of Quincy’s challenge of a lower-court ruling that sided with Merit Construction Alliance, a Kingston-based nonprofit that represents 75 non-union contractors.

Last year, U.S. District Court Judge Rya Zobel ruled that Quincy’s ordinance requiring contractors bidding on public works jobs to have a state-approved apprentice program – used by most trade unions – violates the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act, which sets minimum labor standards for private employers.

The appeals court decision essentially means cities and towns in the First Circuit, consisting of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Maine, New Hampshire and Puerto Rico, can no longer narrow the bidding process by requiring apprentice training.

Ronald N. Cogliano, president of the Merit Construction Alliance, said the ruling creates an even playing field for non-union shops that have been passed over for public jobs. Many such shops don’t have apprentice-training programs.

On Thursday, City Councilor James Timmins said Quincy’s apprentice requirement was meant to ensure that all construction workers were properly trained.

“The apprenticeship training programs have been a very productive part of our community and workforce development,” Timmins said Thursday. “It’s a loss that goes beyond the trade unions and into the community.”

On Friday morning, Bob Rizzi, president of the Quincy and South Shore Building Trades Council, said the court's decision is bad for the city of Quincy, for construction workers and for taxpayers.

"It's a great win for low wages," Rizzi said. "Kinds who wanted to go to apprentice school instead of college just got that dream taken away from them."

In 2012, the Merit Construction Alliance sued Quincy as it was about to open the bidding process for a $50 million Central Middle School project. The group contended that Quincy’s “responsible employer ordinance,” which sets the terms under which the city awards contracts, contained illegal provisions.

The suit pointed to elements of the Quincy ordinance that mirror ones in Fall River that a federal judge struck down in 2011. The Quincy and Fall River cases are part of a broader push to challenge ordinances, which in many ways mirror employment conditions set by labor unions, across the state.

In response to Merit’s lawsuit, the city agreed to stop requiring that contractors’ crews be at least one-third Quincy residents for city projects. In a 2011 ruling on a similar Fall River ordinance, Zobel ruled that such requirements give contractors with local employees an unfair advantage in securing municipal work.

Quincy scored a minor victory Wednesday when the appeals court said the city did not have to pay Merit’s attorney’s fees – at least not yet. Last August, Zobel ordered the city to pay about $81,000 in attorneys’ fees for Merit.

Although the city agreed to pay $20,725 that corresponded to the plaintiff’s successful efforts against the city residency requirement, it is arguing that it should not have to pay the remaining $60,000.

The appeals court directed the district court to revisit the attorney’s-fees decision and determine whether Quincy has to pay the remainder of the costs.

Patrick Ronan may be reached at pronan@ledger.com. Follow him on Twitter @PRonan_Ledger.